BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND SKILLS

Competitiveness Council

David Willetts: My noble Friend the Minister of State for Trade and Investment has made the following statement:
	The EU Competitiveness Council took place in Brussels on 20 and 21 February 2014. The UK was represented by Lord Livingston on day one (industry and internal market) and David Willetts on day two (research and space). A summary of those discussions follows.
	The main internal market and industry issues discussed were industrial competitiveness and the annual growth survey.
	The Council began with a discussion about industrial competitiveness. Member states were asked to outline their priorities for improving industrial competitiveness, achieving a balance between climate, energy and competitiveness policies and how to mainstream industrial competitiveness into all policy areas. In its presentation, the Commission outlined its overall approach, noting that: all policy proposals should be competitiveness proofed; support should be given to innovative SMEs; and Competitiveness Council should play a greater role on industrial policy. The Commission also reiterated its proposed target to boost industry’s share of EU GDP to 20%. The UK called for: the EU to focus on creating the right single market conditions; reduced burdens; a strong state aid regime; free trade agreements; a cost-effective and flexible energy and climate framework; a reformed emissions trading system; robust action to prevent carbon leakage; and a single energy market. The UK also emphasised that the EU should not be distracted by artificial targets on industrialisation.
	This was followed by a discussion regarding the annual growth survey. The Commission noted the progress many member states had made on their country specific recommendations, but argued that too many service sector barriers remained. Key sectors where action should be taken included business and professional services, construction and retail. The UK emphasised the need to fully implement the services directive, called on the Commission to urgently provide guidance on proportionality, and suggested following a sectoral approach for further services liberalisation—for example, professional business services.
	Eight AOB points were discussed: the ninth ministerial meeting of the Union for the Mediterranean on Euro-Mediterranean industrial co-operation; the European tourism quality principles; the European strategy for costal and maritime tourism; state aid modernisation; hybrid nutrition labelling; non-financial and diversity information and the statute for a European foundation.
	Research and space issues were covered on 21 February. During research discussions, the Commission noted that many member states were cutting their research budgets due to the overriding driver of fiscal consolidation—a careful balance had to be found or this would risk damaging their research and development capacity and the knowledge economy.
	References were made to the importance of linking research agendas—both national and Horizon 2020—to structural fund spending. Germany and the UK warned of the risks of unhelpful regulation at European level, with the UK highlighting that the precautionary principle needed to be revisited and that “gold” open access to publications should be the norm in Europe.
	On the European research area Council conclusions, the Commission clarified that the European research area was complete at a European level, but this now needed to be complemented by member states’ action to implement the policies identified.
	On the AOB items on public-public research partnerships and public-private research partnerships the presidency updated on the recent negotiations with the European Parliament. On the AOB item on international co-operation, the Commission welcomed the renewal of the science and technology agreement.
	On the space policy debate on relations between the European Union and the European Space Agency, the presidency highlighted that both organisations were analysing similar policy options: to do nothing, have closer collaboration on policies and space missions, to have a dedicated directorate in the European Space Agency operating in accordance with EU rules on procurement, or to disband the European Space Agency and establish a new agency within the EU with similar functions. The majority of member states including the UK expressed a preference to undertake further consideration of the middle two options although the UK noted that the concepts still needed further definition and that the case for new EU legislation to implement them had not been made.
	There was widespread consensus that both organisations needed to respect each other’s expertise more and become more pragmatic in their relationship. The UK proposed that there should be a joint ESA/EU “Space Council” at the end of the year to discuss which approach to take.

JUSTICE

Prison Service Pay Review Body

Jeremy Wright: My right hon. Friend the Minister of State for Justice, Lord Faulks, has made the following written ministerial statement:
	I am today announcing the start of the triennial review of the Prison Service Pay Review Body. Triennial reviews of non-departmental public bodies (NDPBs) are part of the Government’s commitment to ensuring, and improving, the accountability and effectiveness of public bodies.
	Section 127 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 prohibits the inducement of operational staff within the prison service to take industrial action. As a “compensatory mechanism” for their inability lawfully to take such action, the Prison Service Pay Review Body provides advice to the Secretary of State about the pay of those staff.
	The review will be conducted in accordance with Government guidance for reviewing non-departmental public bodies, and will focus on the core questions of effectiveness and good governance. It will be carried out in an open and transparent way, and interested stakeholders will be given the opportunity to feed in their views. I shall announce the findings of the review in due course.